responses to the problem of evil

what are the 2 responses to the problem of evil

• the soul making theodicy

• free will defence

what kind of arg. is the free will defence

deductive - if the premises are true then the conclusion must also be true

what is meant by significantly free (free will defence)

free to do or refrain from doing an action that is morally right or wrong

what is the main aim of the arg. (free will defence)

to argue that the existence of God is consistent with the existence of moral evil

give the arg in standard form (free will defence)

• a world containing significantly free creatures is better than a world without free creatures and better than no world at all (as with no significantly free beings there can be no moral good)

• therefore if God creates a world then it must be a world with significantly free creatures

• if a world contains significantly free creatures then it is possible for moral evil to exist in the world

• therefore if God creates a world with significantly free creatures then it must be a world in which moral evil is possible

• therefore, the existence of moral evil is logically compatible with the existence of God

what example does plantinga use for his free will defence

the example of curly smith

• shows that it may not be possible for God to create a world with both free beings and no evil

• curly is a free being who has a corrupt nature and so in any possible world he will choose at least one evil action

• so in this case to is not possible for God to create a world without evil

what are the responses to plantings free will defense

• if we accept the free will defence, the conclusion is limited to explaining that God is consistent with the existence of moral evil - natural evil is still not explained

• we can reject the first point, depending on our approach to moral philosophy. it may be that the existence of significantly free beings is not morally valuable, or does not outweigh the moral evil that comes as a consequence.

what kind of arg is it (soul making theodicy)

deductive - if the premises are true then the conclusion must also be true

what is meant by moral growth (soul making theodicy)

the process of acquiring virtues and for the theist, becoming closer to God

what is the main aim of the arg (soul making theodicy)

to argue that the existence of god is consistent with the existence of evil

give the arg in standard form (soul making theodicy)

• a world containing evil is required for humans ti be capable of moral development, including the acquisition of certain virtues

• a supremely good God would want his creatures to be capable of moral development, including the acquisition of such virtues as we strive for perfection/to be like God

• therefore, if God creates a world, then it must be a world with evil

how does hick develop his argument and what example does he give

• hick discusses the difference between keeping pets and raising children to argue by analogy that God has made a world permitting evil as it is required for moral growth and to develop perfection.

• he argues that evil is necessary for developing our good and this process continues into the afterlife

• hick says even though the quantity of suffering seems to be a lot, he says that it is the case in order for there to be sufficient epistemic distance in order for us to freely love him

what are the responses to the soul making theodicy

• animal suffering: as animals do not experience moral growth, hick cannot justify animal suffering in this way

• terrible evils: these evils are unjustified, while ordinary evils enable character growth but there appears ti be little justification for the scale of some evils

• pointless evils: there are many examples where a person suffers evil and does not grow as a result. this undermines Hick’s reasoning